Is Tontobalboa an "Author"?

Independent Film - Mockumentary - Stuntman - The Movie by Tontobalboa

In Deciding whether or not this film should be published, or produced and shown in movie festivals with short films, I had to look into the current social conventions about short films and the idea of what types of films should be developed and produced.  This film uses the documentary format to fictitiously portray a stunt double working on a film, as well as the man for whom he is doubling.  The film is shot fairly professionally; there is good continuity and there is a definite narrative to the story.  The film's color is off.  There is a yellowish tint to the film. While the acting is amateurish, there are some good comedic scenes portraying the emotions of the characters.  This film is a parody, which is obvious, but uses conventions of film to make its case to be included in the world of "film."  This fellow, Tontobalboa, works within the existing filmmaking framework to portray his vision of a comedic look at the stupidity of using a stunt double for such a weak stunt.

In the Pierre Bourdieau reading, we see the conventions of publishing which must be met.  He breaks it down into two categories at the beginning of the piece.  There is that idea of high art, which this film does not meet.  He also asserts the idea of "art for art's sake.''  Here is the gray area in which we can decide whether Tontobalboa's film should be published.  It is obvious that he has already found an outlet for his art in You Tube.  And, perhaps, that is where this short film should stay.  If I am the editor, the decision maker, than I control the standards for deciding what should be "authored" and what should not be.  This film should not be.  It does not pass my standards for publishing, which is that it will appeal to a large audience, is good quality and makes a timely and contemporary argument.  It is fun to watch, but that is the extent of its appeal.